United States v. Bailey

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• ruling that “[a] protest is not sufficient ... which alleges merely that the amount of the duties assessed by the collector is erroneous,” because “[s]uch a blanket form, if sufficient, could be used in every case”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Saab Cars Usa, Inc. v. United States, Defendant-Cross
  Federal Circuit· 2006-01-17· cited 85×
• Garod Radio Corp. v. United States
  U.S. Customs Court· 1961-05-11· cited 5×
• Saab Cars USA v. United States
  Federal Circuit· 2006-01-17

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Coe v. Armour Fertilizer Works
  Supreme Court· 1915-05-03· cited 263×
• Barnes v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway
  Supreme Court· 1887-05-23· cited 26×
• Downing & Co. v. United States
  Customs and Patent Appeals· 1922-05-09· cited 21×
• Loudon ex rel. Floyd v. United States
  U.S. Customs Court· 1942-10-14· cited 15×
• Lichtenstein v. United States
  Customs and Patent Appeals· 1910-11-30· cited 14×
• United States v. Cone & Co.
  Customs and Patent Appeals· 1920-04-10· cited 3×
• Protest 908954-G of Stone & Downer Co.
  U.S. Customs Court· 1940-06-21· cited 1×